BERLIN (AFP) - The European aerospace giant EADS is facing new problems with its A400M military transport plane which could delay its maiden flight expected in July, a Germany weekly reported.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080105.../germanyfranceaerospacecompanyeads

Quote: The problems do not only concern the plane's engines but also the fuselage and the wings, the executive said.

Just that? From the title of this thread, I thought it was something potentially serious.  

The engines, fuselage and wings!?!?

WTF, over?

I can't imagine Airbus/EADS have this thing this completely screwed up. Are there any more articles anywhere that shed more light here? Anyone with inside info?

European and other Air Forces are flying very old airplanes right now and need to increase capacity as well as reliability adn safety.

I wonder if it's serious will that convince NATO to go ahead and purchase a C-17 fleet and some individual nations to buy some Herks?

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 1): Quote: The problems do not only concern the plane's engines but also the fuselage and the wings, the executive said. Just that? From the title of this thread, I thought it was something potentially serious.

The article doesn't elaborate in the least. Design structural problems? Material deficiencies? I suspect the latter. I can't quite imagine Airbus messing up on something like load limits, etc.

Im sure Boeing is as happy as can be!

Quoting Mark5388916 (Reply 4): Im sure Boeing is as happy as can be!

Lockheed is probably happier.

*smashes head on desk* yeah they would be...

Mark

EDIT: Spelling

[Edited 2008-01-05 19:03:08]

Quoting DL021 (Reply 2): I can't imagine Airbus/EADS have this thing this completely screwed up.

I can. Wouldn't be the first time...

Quoting DL021 (Reply 2): European and other Air Forces are flying very old airplanes right now and need to increase capacity as well as reliability adn safety.

Nah. There's a far cheaper alternative: just scrap the current fleets without replacement and charter some Russian An-124s when you need them (and hope that you don't need them for something the Russians don't agree with).
That's what several countries are looking at as a cheap alternative.

Quoting Mark5388916 (Reply 4): Im sure Boeing is as happy as can be!

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 7): Nah. There's a far cheaper alternative: just scrap the current fleets without replacement and charter some Russian An-124s when you need them (and hope that you don't need them for something the Russians don't agree with). That's what several countries are looking at as a cheap alternative.

From my point of view the German goverment has never learned instead of a midlife replacement they fly their
helicopters and airplanes as long as possible and wait very long until they finally decide on a replacement which usually comes 10-15 years too late. Some of the Bell Uh 1Ds and Transalls should have been replaced with modern equipment 10 years ago.

Well so far EADS hasn't publicly acknowledged the extent of these alleged problems--"alleged" as in they haven't been confirmed.

But...if they are serious, will the German Air Force require interim lift until significant numbers of A400s are fielded? Leasing is a possibility, as is ad hoc contracting. I'm not holding out hope that any C-17s will be purchases as that could lead to a re-examining of the program. I think Jwenting makes a valid point here:

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 7): charter some Russian An-124s when you need them (and hope that you don't need them for something the Russians don't agree with).

Quoting Columba (Reply 8): Quoting Jwenting (Reply 7):Nah. There's a far cheaper alternative: just scrap the current fleets without replacement and charter some Russian An-124s when you need them (and hope that you don't need them for something the Russians don't agree with). That's what several countries are looking at as a cheap alternative. From my point of view the German goverment has never learned instead of a midlife replacement they fly their helicopters and airplanes as long as possible and wait very long until they finally decide on a replacement which usually comes 10-15 years too late. Some of the Bell Uh 1Ds and Transalls should have been replaced with modern equipment 10 years ago.

That is the Norwegian way. We have done it with the choppers. The Orions are now going on a life-extension program. The decision on new fighters are overdue. And we did it with the Herc, resulting in us relying on charted AN-124s and IL-76s until the new Hercs are arriving.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 9): Well so far EADS hasn't publicly acknowledged the extent of these alleged problems--"alleged" as in they haven't been confirmed.

I thought an EADS spokesman was quoted in the article as commenting that these problems do exist. What he didn't do was elaborate on the extent of the problems.

Quoting Mark5388916 (Reply 4): I'm sure Boeing is as happy as can be!

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5): Lockheed is probably happier.

Since the A400M nicely slots in between the C-17 and the C-130, I expect both would be pleased since both would benefit from a hypothetical cancellation of the A400M program or purchase.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12): Since the A400M nicely slots in between the C-17 and the C-130, I expect both would be pleased since both would benefit from a hypothetical cancellation of the A400M program or purchase.

As much I would hope for either the C17 or the C130J I don´t believe this will happen. They will fly the C160 until it falls apart and rely on chartered An124s and the A310s.

So wings, engines, and fuselage? That kind of sounds like the entire plane.... Does that mean a total redesign or what. It sounds kind of funny to say there is a problem with pretty much the entire plane

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 14): So wings, engines, and fuselage? That kind of sounds like the entire plane...Does that mean a total redesign or what. It sounds kind of funny to say there is a problem with pretty much the entire plane.

The A400M is a major new exercise for Airbus. Unexpected problems and delays are not surprising in such a case.

Ask Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrup-Grumman, Eurofighter, Eurocopter, Panavia, Tuoplev, Mikoyan, etc. 

Quoting Stitch (Reply 12): Since the A400M nicely slots in between the C-17 and the C-130, I expect both would be pleased since both would benefit from a hypothetical cancellation of the A400M program or purchase.

However, the A400M is targeted more at the C-130, both being turboprops. Plus, I wonder if some of the European customers who might think they have a critical need for transport aircraft, would rather buy from Lockheed rather than Boeing.

Good to know the empennage and landing gear are on track for a roll out though.

I'll just state the obvious; before the PR/spin begins they should just offer the Antonov folks a nice fair price to certificate and start producing the -70. Force the disgraced engineers to move to the Ukraine to learn how it is done.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 15): The A400M is a major new exercise for Airbus. Unexpected problems and delays are not surprising in such a case.

  

However, when was the last time any manufacturer had a "problem" with all the major components of a new model? In all fairness, though, until EADS comes out with a more detailed explanation, we're all just speculating here. And I can't believe there would be a problem with all the major components. While it may be a new exercise for Airbus, this is not the first time they are building a sophisticated airplane. My guess would be there's a single problem that's affecting the wings and fuselage. Perhaps something related to the engines, which are already problem plagued?

AP is reporting that EADS is denying the reported delays, with Gallois saying:

Quote: "We have made no new evaluation since the original one which led us to predict a 6 to 12 month delay," Gallois said at a defence industry event near Paris. "I said that the first (A400M) flight would be in the summer and I continue to say that,"

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/200801...-airbus-a400m-germany-d1a0d5d.html

I suppose we could split hairs and point out that summer doesn't end until September 21. He also left a convenient "out" by saying no new evaluation has been performed.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 19): AP is reporting that EADS is denying the reported delays

Gee, isn't that what they said with the A-380 program?  

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20): Gee, isn't that what they said with the A-380 program?

almost every new aircraft has it's developement problems..

Hacking into the flight control system of a 787 with your PDA anyone??

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 21): Hacking into the flight control system of a 787 with your PDA anyone??

I'd like to meet the computer geek that can do that.  

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22): I'd like to meet the computer geek that can do that.

As would the FAA, the FBI, and several other of the alphabet people.  

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 21): Hacking into the flight control system of a 787 with your PDA anyone??

Cute. But I wouldn't necessarily call that particular issue a "problem". It's more on the order of addressing the results of a "gap analysis" (i.e., "provide more information to ensure this issue can't occur").

Now, if the 787's wing snaps at 147% of design failure, then I'd say there's a problem.  

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 22): I'd like to meet the computer geek that can do that.

Quoting Michlis (Reply 23): As would the FAA, the FBI, and several other of the alphabet people.

you'de be surprised. If there is a possiblity, there's a geek out there that could exploit it. the FAA is worried enough anyway

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 24): Cute. But I wouldn't necessarily call that particular issue a "problem". It's more on the order of addressing the results of a "gap analysis" (i.e., "provide more information to ensure this issue can't occur"). Now, if the 787's wing snaps at 147% of design failure, then I'd say there's a problem.

nice snap back at the A380   BTW< the 787 has serious other problems BTW

Quoting Michlis (Reply 23): As would the FAA, the FBI, and several other of the alphabet people.

Or the most derded of all the alphabet soup people.........the IRS   

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 24): Now, if the 787's wing snaps at 147% of design failure, then I'd say there's a problem.

Not if we build it in France

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 25): the 787 has serious other problems BTW

What would that be? More B-787s in airline service at the end of 2008 than A-380s?

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 18): However, when was the last time any manufacturer had a "problem" with all the major components of a new model?

I know, I know.......Airbus, with the A-380!!!!!!!!!!!!   

But, back to the A-400M. At least we can say she can stand on her own wheels.      

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 26): But, back to the A-400M. At least we can say she can stand on her own wheels.

Not only that. Flightglobal reports that the first A400M is to undergo ground testing (without the engines, of course). Pictures here.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ansport-enters-ground-testing.html

Quote:
"Airbus Military's first flight-test example of the A400M transport has entered ground system and load testing, after being towed from its jigs (.....) on EADS Casa's Seville final assembly line in southern Spain on 2 January.

Aircraft MSN001's wing and tail structures were added last month, but EADS is still awaiting the availability of Europrop International's TP400-D6 turboprop engine, which should make its flight debut on a modified Lockheed Martin C-130K in the first quarter of this year.

[.....]

.....EADS chief executive Louis Gallois said on 10 January: 'We will have the first flight during summer 2008.' But he cautioned: 'We have to stabilise the programme for good, especially with our engine manufacturing partners'."

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 27): Pictures here..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html

Actually, she is looking good.

The artical mentions "load testing" usually that comes later in the flight test phase, so I'm not real sure I understand what exactly they are talking about.

I know it is not the wing flex testing, as this is not the airplane that will be done on, this one is MSN1, the first flight test airplane. The wing flex test airplane will be tested to breaking.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 28): Actually, she is looking good.

Actually, she looks about one year from first flight. Bolting the wing to the fuselage used to be a milestone. But with modern aircraft, wiring, avionics and software are the long lead items. Based on the photos, I wager late November if EADS pulls out all the stops.

Have fun,

CTR

Based on EADS A-400 track record, I'd guess November 2009 is a good hope.

Quoting Jwenting (Reply 7): Nah. There's a far cheaper alternative: just scrap the current fleets without replacement and charter some Russian An-124s when you need them (and hope that you don't need them for something the Russians don't agree with).

Trouble is that for tactical transport you can't rely on charter aircraft which can be denied to you by the owners for political reasons or for simply the fact that they don't want to risk their expensive airplanes in combat situations. You can't rely on chartered aircraft for tactical transport....which is most of the mission for the A400.

Quoting Columba (Reply 8): From my point of view the German goverment has never learned instead of a midlife replacement they fly their helicopters and airplanes as long as possible and wait very long until they finally decide on a replacement which usually comes 10-15 years too late.

They know there's a problem but they've got to fund the social security and health programs before defence or the voters will throw them out.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 26): What would that be? More B-787s in airline service at the end of 2008 than A-380s?

you just watch your local news service carefully and see if they make their planned first flight date   not to mention first delivery.

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 32): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 26): What would that be? More B-787s in airline service at the end of 2008 than A-380s? you just watch your local news service carefully and see if they make their planned first flight date not to mention first delivery.

        

Quoting CTR (Reply 29): Bolting the wing to the fuselage used to be a milestone.

It was for both the A-380 and B-787, so, have the wings on the A-400 been bolted on, or are they just sitting up there?

Quoting CTR (Reply 29): But with modern aircraft, wiring, avionics and software are the long lead items.

Don't forget the rivets.

Quoting Texl1649 (Reply 30): Based on EADS A-400 track record, I'd guess November 2009 is a good hope.

  

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 33): It was for both the A-380 and B-787, so, have the wings on the A-400 been bolted on, or are they just sitting up there?

I can't tell if you unfamiliar with the construction of modern aircraft, or are you trying to be funny

No, bolting a wing on a modern aircraft currently means very little. It is approximately equivalent to setting a monitor on top of a computer without having installed any cables or software. Pretty to look at, but not worth a damn.

Have fun,

CTR

Since the A400 was designed about the same time as the 380, could it have the same incompatability problems the 380 experienced between different CAD software programs?

Ruscoe

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 35): Since the A400 was designed about the same time as the 380, could it have the same incompatability problems the 380 experienced between different CAD software programs?

I think, although I may be wrong, that the A400 design was frozen sometime in 2005 (that is when I recall reading something to that effect). That is the same year that Airbus realized the problem with the A380. So even if the compatibility issue was the same, EADS has had ample time to correct it (certainly to acknowledge it). Nevertheless, you bring up a very interesting point. However, I still believe whatever is ailing the airframe is related to the problems with the powerplants. At least I hope that is what the ailment is; otherwise, it would mean the basic airframe itself has inherent deficiencies.

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 36): However, I still believe whatever is ailing the airframe is related to the problems with the powerplants. At least I hope that is what the ailment is; otherwise, it would mean the basic airframe itself has inherent deficiencies.

That is what EADS/Airbus says the problems are. Until something shows up that adds creditable information, that is really all we have.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 37): That is what EADS/Airbus says the problems are. Until something shows up that adds creditable information, that is really all we have.

People making throwaway comments like this regarding the 787 programme are (rightly) getting flamed for it.
Cheap shot (IMO   )

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 26): Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 18): However, when was the last time any manufacturer had a "problem" with all the major components of a new model? I know, I know.......Airbus, with the A-380!!!!!!!!!!!!

Two cheap shots for the price of 1??????
Value for money if nothing else...  

Regards

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 37): Until something shows up that adds creditable information, that is really all we have.

Just have a look at www.flightglobal.com and www.airbusmilitary.com, they have good info available like :

from www.airbusmilitary.com

"the first complete A400M airframe was removed from the assembly jigs at the FAL on January 2nd" (4 Jan)
"a TP400 development engine was installed on the wing of a converted C-130 Hercules aircraft on December 3rd" (30 Nov)
"mounted in place of the C-130’s inner port engine, is being readied by Marshall for flight tests that are due to begin in the spring of 2008." (30 Nov)
"all electrical, hydraulic, pneumatic and fuel systems completed and the four engine pylons installed, the complete 42 metre-long carbon composite wing has now been joined to the A400M’s fuselage." (30 Nov)

from www.flightglobal.com

"Europe's Airbus Military A400M programme has entered 2008 on a positive note, with ground system and load testing having commenced at EADS Casa's Seville facility in southern Spain using flight test aircraft MSN001. Towed from its final assembly line jigs on 2 January, the aircraft remains on schedule to make its flight debut in mid-year, insists lead stakeholder EADS, which last week refuted a report by German business magazine WirtschaftsWoche that the already revised target could slip further."
"EADS says the newly launched period of ground tests - building on MSN001's "power on" milestone achieved last October - will include strain gauge calibration tests"

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...s-using-first-a400m-transport.html

At the Airbus press conference today, the A-400M program is "delayed, 6-12 months".

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40): At the Airbus press conference today, the A-400M program is "delayed, 6-12 months".

Is this a new delay, or the one that had previously been announced ? I didn't catch all of it, the questions I heard seemed to think it may have been referring to the old announcement.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 41): Is this a new delay, or the one that had previously been announced ? I didn't catch all of it, the questions I heard seemed to think it may have been referring to the old announcement.

That's what I think it is, just a confirmation of what we already knew. Tom did say the engines are the biggest delay, and there is a "wire problem". He said this a little later in the news conference. I assume he really was saying a "wiring problem". Since it was mentioned, I assume it is not a simple problem but is a significant one.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 42): Tom did say the engines are the biggest delay,

Well that has been the case since the initial ground runs made them go back and redesign some bits, prevented the flight testing until the design was changed, parts made, new ground runs etc

I was very happy to see it taken from the FAL, they only do that when the wing is integrated to the fuse system wise.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 43): I was very happy to see it taken from the FAL, they only do that when the wing is integrated to the fuse system wise.

Do you know when the structual test airframe will be completed? I have not scene anything written about it. That frame is just as important to the test program as any of the flight test frames are.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 44): Do you know when the structual test airframe will be completed? I have not scene anything written about it.

"Europe's Airbus Military A400M programme has entered 2008 on a positive note, with ground system and load testing having commenced at EADS Casa's Seville facility in southern Spain using flight test aircraft MSN001."

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...s-using-first-a400m-transport.html

"The process of “Power-On” began at the end of October this year. The process consists of testing the electrical systems and installations and making sure that the general man-machine interface is functioning correctly; (on/off buttons, warnings, displays, and associated computers on the AFDX network which allows inter-computer dialogue).

Other specific systems, such as flight controls, hydraulics and the other remaining electrics will be also tested after these preliminary steps. Teams of specialists verify all the related sub-systems in every detail, thoroughly testing cables, circuit breakers and connections. Power-on to the nose fuselage is a major step in the global power-on process, which also includes tests on the wing and the fuselage."

http://www.a400m-countdown.com/index.php?v=7&spage=3

"The Flight Test Installation (FTI) Pre- Wiring Jig (PWJ) is a 17 metre long, 18 tonne test installation, which is used to record all measurements during the flight test programme. It comprises all the racks installed in the development aircraft, but also all the desktops and computers used by the Flight Test Engineers. A considerable part of the A380 FTI was re-used and adapted to the specific military environment of the A400M. Since the A400M is smaller than the A380, the design had to be optimised and the racks had to be positioned on pallets, there being no seat-rails to fix them to the floor. The A400M cargo hold consists of a single deck so the avionics systems have to be installed in the confined space below the floor as there is no underfloor luggage compartment as in a civil aircraft. A power-chain is installed on the FTI pallets enabling them to be moved and to improve access.

Thanks to the preliminary work done in installing the cables prior to fitting the racks, 3000 hours were saved on the 20000 hours usually needed for the validation tests. This process not only improves the quality of the installation, but also reduces potential anomalies. The first of the five test installations (for the five test aircraft) was delivered to the FAL and "Power-on" to the MSN 001 Flight Test Installation was successfully performed in mid-October. The validation work of the complete FTI, with the PWJ connected to all sensors throughout the aircraft, will be completed at the FAL before the hand-over to the Aircraft Test Centre prior to the first flight."

http://www.a400m-countdown.com/index.php?v=7&spage=4

Judging by what we've seen so far there's a lot of what we used to call 'visual progress' going on.

Simply stated, developing a new, special purpose engine from scratch is a dicey job. When I worked for Garrett in the eitghties we were still doing planetary gearset mods and service bulletins on the 731 gearcase and that engine had been in production since the late 1960s. Likewise the ATF3.

Europrop is just at the beginning of a very long development road before they've got a solid reliable engine that does what they said it would-if ever. It's an enormously complex design, too-by comparison the 731 was a lawnmower engine although the ATF 3 was a pretty complicated piece of gee whizzery with three spools.

The Europrop people have a big job on their hands, but the prime contractor is the one who selected an untried combination of vendors to produce something they could have bought from one contractor (Pratt & Whitney Canada) for 20 per cent less money. That was simply a stupid assed idea.

One could posit any number of conspiracy theories, but the fact is, they chose an untried combination-albeit experienced firms-that had not built heavy turboprops in a long time. In fact the last heavy turboprop Rolls built was probably the Dart or the Tyne. Alhough Rolls owns what used to be Allison and those folks do have that experience, my guess is that their role in Europrop doesn't amount to a fart in a windstorm.

Well, as my old man used to say when I brought home some god awful mess, he'd look up from his newspaper over the top of his glasses, and say "Well, you bought it, now fix it." and go back to his paper.

Lightsaber, help me out here. Tell these people developing a good solid engine isn't done in two or three years.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 46): Lightsaber, help me out here. Tell these people developing a good solid engine isn't done in two or three years.

But didn't P&W and Europrop both use an existing engine design to build on ? Neither was clean sheet (?)

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 33):

did you have a good laugh today when you watched the news?

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 46): Tell these people developing a good solid engine isn't done in two or three years.

I'm not him but I'll remind people that when Allison, who've been building airplane engines for over 60 years and turboprop engines on the Herk when number one took to the skies over Burbank with Kelly Johnson in chase, had one hell of a time getting the vibrations out of the new AE2100 engines when the J model took to the skies for the first time.

If they had trouble with a development of a proven engine with the six bladed props...imagine the trouble getting it right from scratch without the institutional knowledgebase and experience.